The boat on top sports a very odd sailplan. To my eye, the main is extremely small, and the spreaders look like they are swept back at least 45deg. , making the only main useless and chafeprone while reaching. Also, she is a little hard on the eyes.

I guess that "main" is mostly for balance the boat, a bad weather sail and a sail to be used (reffed) to have the boat straight to the wind on anchorage.

By hard on your eyes I guess you mean the rig? I agree but I think that will change with the sails up. Can you imagine? Rare, but not ugly. Probably it will make the boat look bigger. This rig gives plenty of power to the boat and will be very easy to handle. Downwind it will work like a dream, with both genoas polled to opposite sides.

On strong winds the smaller inner front sail and the small "main" will give it a perfect balance and I guess they will be able to take a lot of wind, tolled and reefed if needed.

It seems expensive to me but I can see me solo handling that big boat with ease, a lot more than the other one that has much bigger but also less sails

The boat is very similar to the 8.50 but 64cms longer . It has more 10cm of beam (3.60 to 3.70m) has more 6m2 of sail (53 to 59m2) but regarding the weight we don't know nothing and I doubt the boat can be lighter than the 8.50 (2800kg), probably it will be heavier.

The weight is stated by Pogo to 2800kg, let's hope it doesn't exceed that by much. It will definitely be interesting to hear some reviews of this boat. The boat looks better than I thought it would, I thought the freeboards would look much higher.

I have no doubts that the Pogo is a much seaworthy offshore boat, made to cross oceans and easier to sail while the Seascape is a Coastal small cruiser, but in what regards speed and fun, I guess the Seascape is on another world

They say about the project guidelines:

Seascape 27 offers a truly unique experience: the comfort of a 4-berth sailing boat with a separate wet room and toilet compartment, perfect for family cruising, as well as for inshore and offshore regattas, thanks to her superior sailing performance, versatility and easy handling. The boat is ready for sailing or transport in an hour or so, whereas her dimensions allow for trailer or shipping container transportation. Both innovations ensure the owner the benefits of easy accessibility to diverse cruising locations without the costs associated with year-round berthing....

The .. biggest problem that we noticed during our extensive involvement in yacht racing is: assembling a crew larger than 3–4 people is a real pain in the a**, not to mention that it is very difﬁcult to recruit it from the members of our own families.

Therefore both our boats, 18 and 27, are designed to be shorthanded and family friendly. In practice that means that full crew for Seascape 27 in inshore races is 3 or 4, but she can easily sail double handed or solo for navigations or long distance races. Since she is light, the loads on the ropes are relatively low, and her deck gear is generously sized so that everybody can participate.

Curiously the boat was designed by a Racer/designer, one of the best, Sam Manuard that is a specialist on the minis. His minis are dominating the class. It is nice to see a designer specialized in fast beamy boats with not to much ballast doing a hell of a boat, relatively narrow and with a big B/D. Definitively Sam Manuard is very good and is one of NA that deserve to be followed closely.

My objection to torpedo keels is both concern re picking up stray objects and when combined with a fast boat the damage that keel would do to any creature it came into contact with. That is also my concern with fast boats overall. Hit a sunfish e.g at under ten knots and you may scare the hell out of both you and the fish but hopefully the encounter would not be fatal. Hit the same fish at 20 knots with one of those super sharp keels and I'm thinking minced fish.

So I'm not against those keels on performance grounds, nor do I object to lightness in a boat as such. It is simply that to a very large extent I am content with moderate performance and moderate weight if that combines to make for a nice comfortable ride.

That said, as someone who is most often sailing short handed the smaller the gear I have to manage the better and all things considered a lightweight fractionally rigged boat is likely to be easier to handle than a heavy masthead.

I'm thinking that our Malo is somewhere in the middle though more towards heavy than light. I do love the solidity of the thing, the quietness and not so lively movement particularly at anchor though I do sometimes wonder if something a wee bit lighter might be easier to handle without moving to the noise of very lightweight hulls. Newer generation boats from Malo and HR, plus the XC Series and the Swede you posted earlier would all be on my list were we to move up but frankly they are all out of my price range at roughly twice to three times what we paid for our old girl.

My objection to torpedo keels is both concern re picking up stray objects and when combined with a fast boat the damage that keel would do to any creature it came into contact with. That is also my concern with fast boats overall. Hit a sunfish e.g at under ten knots and you may scare the hell out of both you and the fish but hopefully the encounter would not be fatal. Hit the same fish at 20 knots with one of those super sharp keels and I'm thinking minced fish.

So I'm not against those keels on performance grounds, nor do I object to lightness in a boat as such. It is simply that to a very large extent I am content with moderate performance and moderate weight if that combines to make for a nice comfortable ride.

That said, as someone who is most often sailing short handed the smaller the gear I have to manage the better and all things considered a lightweight fractionally rigged boat is likely to be easier to handle than a heavy masthead.

I'm thinking that our Malo is somewhere in the middle though more towards heavy than light. I do love the solidity of the thing, the quietness and not so lively movement particularly at anchor though I do sometimes wonder if something a wee bit lighter might be easier to handle without moving to the noise of very lightweight hulls. Newer generation boats from Malo and HR, plus the XC Series and the Swede you posted earlier would all be on my list were we to move up but frankly they are all out of my price range at roughly twice to three times what we paid for our old girl.

cheers

Andrew B

Well, I guessed you thought like that, but I did not resist to a little provocation

Regarding hitting sea animals, mainly mammals, I guess that a bulbed keel would make almost as much damage as a torpedo keel at 20k.

I believe that mammals just are not used to have relatively silent boats to arrive so quickly. I don't hear stories of mammals being hit by motor yachts or ships and those are as fast or faster than most sailing boats even very fast ones.

I have no doubt that the mammals know and hear or fell that a sailboat is approaching they just don't are used that with that kind of noise, not typical from a power boat, a sailboat will come so fast. I guess it is a question of time till they get used to fast sailing boats and get out of the way. They are not stupid

Regarding catching stuff with the keel I guess you are right. I guess it is a small disadvantage to a gain of many hundreds of kg and a boat less expensive (lead is expensive).

I cannot resist to post this small "article" that is a kind of introduction to the Seascape 27 presentation. I don't know if this was written by Sam Manuard (the boat designer) even if I have no doubt he thinks this way. Me to.

Watching the incredible development of offshore racing yachts in the past 20 years, we realized that the gap between custom-made racing and mass production yachts was getting bigger and bigger. Even though some companies ﬁnally started following the trend set by the former, by applying chines to the hull and twin rudders on the transom, we believe the gap is far from being closed, as it lies deeper in mentality of the boatbuilders.

Until recently both racing and cruising yachts were too heavy to plane which meant that your boat-speed was deﬁned by the length of the yacht measured on the water line. With other words, longer was by default faster, and better hull shape and lower displacement of the yacht could only help her get to her maximum speed a bit sooner.

The main problem was sailing downwind where yachts quickly ended up with excessive energy generated by their sails which couldn’t be transfer to speed due to yacht’s inability to plane. This energy was therefore burned as excessive rolling that often ended up in so called “death rolls” which broached or even worse, uncontrollably jibed the yacht.

Consequently, spinnakers were used only by experienced crews, and downwind sailing in strong wind was neither fast, nor safe nor comfortable.
More importantly, such racing yachts were not much different to fast cruisers. Since none of them could plane, heavy wooden furniture didn’t make a major difference in performance.

And then the racing boats started to plane.

Industry launched a new term – the racer-cruiser. At their conception, racer-cruisers looked more like racers, while today, with notable exception of J-boats, Pogo Structures, and a few other non-mainstream manufacturers, look more like cruisers with bigger steering wheels and better ergonomics in the cockpit.

Problem of the modern racer-cruisers is that they are weight sensitive. Add 10% displacement and, instead at 15K the yacht will start to plane at only 20 knots of wind. However, this is true only if a gennaker is used.

Not being able to handle big gennakers at high wind speeds, some crews will therefore bestuck at the uncomfortable and slow displacement speeds, even though the hull would allow them to plane.

The modern racer-cruisers should therefore provide their crews all the necessary comfort without bulky visual luxury in interior and exterior.

The main luxury that this kind of a yacht has to offer is her safety, ergonomics and performance close to those of the modern racing yachts, but achievable with a shorthanded crew.

"Problem of the modern racer-cruisers is that they are weight sensitive. Add 10% displacement and, instead at 15K the yacht will start to plane at only 20 knots of wind. However, this is true only if a gennaker is used."

First quote that addresses weight sensitiveness in 319 pages or a long time. I wonder if 10% displacement should be a rule of thumb for testing the performance cruisers we so much enjoy to learn about. These boats are generally tested empty. Having said that, what is the ideal payload (persons, gear and consumables) and added displacement (installed equipment) of a cruising couple or family of four, and how it should affect, say, a Dufour 36P (6,400kg), an Elan 350 (5,350kg) or a J111 (4,216kg). Added displacement being equal, will it negatively affect more a lighter boat than a same length heavier boat? Or does it mean the contrary, that saving weight on the boat per-se leaves more "room" for crew, gear, consumables and fixed equipment? Are cruisers throwing away money at lighter boats?

In my boat, I used the one design crew weight limit of 748kg as a guide and have ended up with approx. 1000kg, all-in. This equals (a whopping) 21% of empty displacement. (Ok, I carry too much, but 500 of those kg are in water and batteries!).

So I keep wondering about all these super-performers, especially the recent wide stern shapes for downwind planing and if we should be making an observation on cruising added displacement and how different hull shapes "cope" with it. Just a thought.

Yes, your re right about that. That is why I consider that in what regards performance cruising it makes more sense to buy a bigger boat than a smaller boat, I mean for cruising. If you have a light fast 33 ft with 3000kg, 10% will be 300kg.

If you have a fast 42ft with 6500kg, 10% will be 650kg. You cannot cruise with a 300kg payload, at least extensive cruising but with 650kg, if you travel light it is just possible, specially if you have a watermaker.

Anyway in a boat like the Seascape 27 you can have a hell of a boat to enjoy everyday, day sailing, or racing and a fast boat for cruising, but while cruising and with a boat with a reasonable load the performance will be completely different (in what regards planing), unless we are talking about weekend or camping cruising and that is perfectly possible since the boat has a swing keel and can go anywhere, even be pulled to land.

By choosing to post the reply above you agree to the rules you agreed to when joining Sailnet.
Click Here to view those rules.

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the SailNet Community forums, you must first register. Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.Please note: After entering 3 characters a list of Usernames already in use will appear and the list will disappear once a valid Username is entered.

User Name:

Password

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:

Confirm Password:

Email Address

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:

OR

Log-in

User Name

Password

Remember Me?

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.